Excluded the Head of the CDC from high level meeting on virus and quashed debate on origin.

I have a lot of respect, overall, for the CDC.

Dr. Fauci looks less credible to me as time goes on as a member of the body politic that judges this in the political, dare I say, everyday.

We may never know with scientific certainty the origins of the virus. However, as we try to determine little t truth and structure policy going forward. I give little creditability to Dr. Fauci.

Everyone knows how I feel and why I feel it was a lab leak.

The exclusion of the head of the CDC and quashing debate makes Dr. Fauci not creditable to me on this subject being virus origin.

I see and hear no reason not to believe the Former CDC Director’s testimony.

https://www.johnlocke.org/form...-latest-covid-claim/

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/st.../1551798236381417472

https://www.politico.com/amp/n...vids-origin-00086112

I am sure there is a YouTube video if the testimony.

I heard it on Bloomberg radio news.

Dr. Fauci being untruthful to Congress over lab.

https://www.congress.gov/117/m...4-20211201-SD004.pdf

This guy needs to be made to resign or be fired.

I was saying this^^^

When saying this wasn’t cool.

Years ago…I was acquainted with Dr. Bob Redfield. He is a class act.

There is a lot to be skeptical about with all this OP premise.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...18e07f2f2a6db9&ei=11

'Magical thinking': Jamie Raskin wrecks GOP's Covid hearing by scorching Trump
Story by David Edwards • 8h ago

There is nothing skeptical about the Former CDC’s testimony under oath.

Exclusion?

Quashing debate on origin? (As contrasted with quashing the inclusion of facts)

Could that possibly be reaching a conclusion from one fact of testimony?

Just saying.

Would you reach a conclusion that the bat/pangolin/wet market theory/narrative was a lie, and furthermore an intentional lie, knowing better?

You know damn well that many would reach such conclusion from one simple fact disclosed in testimony.

It is his testimony. Just like Jen 6 testimony to the Jan 6 Sub Committee, I have no reason to question it.

You can. I don’t. That is the long and short of it.

There is nothing to tell me this man is lying under oath. Dr. Fauci was at least not
truthful during testimony about US funding.

This guy has nothing to gain. It is not my words being quashed and excluded. It is his words.

You did not post anything that dispute la that this man was excluded by Dr. Fauci nor his opinion not given serious consideration.

You posted that President Trump did not investigate origin sooner. That is bad, but not relevant to this specific conversation.

Wuhan lab studies on bat coronaviruses , coronavirus jumping to humans in Wuhan…it smells like shit…it is
No debate about it…

I don't dispute the facts as you state and disclose, per testimony.

I shall remain skeptical.

Thanks.

Ex-CDC Director Says He Was Excluded From Early Conference Calls on COVID Origins Over Lab Leak Stance

DAILY CALLER
HEALTH

Former CDC Director Says He Was Excluded From COVID Origins Calls Because He Didn’t Support ‘Single Narrative’

MICHAEL GINSBERG
CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT
March 08, 2023
11:06 AM ET

Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director Dr. Robert Redfield said Wednesday he believes he was deliberately excluded from early conference calls discussing the origins of COVID-19.

Redfield told the House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic that National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Dr. Anthony Fauci and National Institutes of Health director Dr. Francis Collins allegedly wanted to promote a “single narrative” about the origins of COVID-19. Redfield, an early proponent of the lab leak theory, has been a staunch critic of investigations conducted by the World Health Organization into the spread of the virus.

“I obviously had a different point of view” from Fauci and Collins, Redfield told Republican New York Rep. Nicole Malliotakis. “I felt it was not scientifically plausible that this virus went from a bat to humans and became one of the most infectious viruses we have in humans. All viruses are not the same. So when you look at coronaviruses, SARS and MERS for example, when they entered the human species which they did via an intermediate, they never learned how to go human to human. Even to this day they don’t know how to go human to human.”

Redfield added he only learned about a Feb. 1, 2020, phone call between Fauci, Collins, Wellcome Trust director Jeremy Farrar and other scientists when emails detailing the call were released as part of a Freedom of Information Act.

“I was quite upset as the CDC director that I was excluded in those discussions. Why would they do this? Because I had a different point of view and I was told they made a decision that they would keep this confidential,” Redfield testified.

Before the call, Scripps Research Institute evolutionary biologist Kristian Andersen emailed Fauci his opinion that features of COVID-19 “potentially” appeared “engineered.” Several days after, however, Andersen wrote he was part of a group “focused on trying to disprove any type of lab theory.” He co-authored the paper titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” which argued for a natural origin of the virus.
~~~~~~~~~

There were lots of people with credentials who disagreed with Anthony 'beagle torturer' Fauci who were ignored, shut down and kept silent. Media and political compliance there. Really sad. Proves one must not trust that your govt has your best interest at heart. It does not.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
I don't dispute the facts as you state and disclose, per testimony.

I shall remain skeptical.

Thanks.

That is a position you can take.
I make two points:
1) There is nothing being presented nor argued to dispute his testimony.
And
2) There is no more reason to be skeptical of his testimony anymore than Jan 6. Of which I accept both in face value under oath as nothing disputes it (not even Tucker).

If you aren't wondering why you've been lied to all along there is nothing that will help you.

Well, if I had to take a firm position on this, it would be that it was a lab leak, sloppy but not intentional.

I don't feel the need to be conclusive about it. I'm not in charge, and my view doesn't matter.

So, I'm skeptical, of all of it, including the govt., the politicians, the media and especially anyone who claims he or she knows the whole truth.

I think it prudent for the powers that be to take all scenarios into account, and take preventative actions accordingly. Whatever the cause is likely to happen again.

===============================================

And yes, ANN, I am wondering - IF I was lied to, by Fauci or others, Why?

I'm very bias about this, as evidenced that in no way, no how can Rand Paul be right about anything.

And the current head of the CDC is a stupid woman more interested in her political position rather the public health!

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I was saying this^^^

When saying this wasn’t cool.

Years ago…I was acquainted with Dr. Bob Redfield. He is a class act.

What a surprise. You're friends with a kook who has previously been widely accused of research misconduct in relation to his work on HIV vaccine.

Redfield was a trump appointee with a bad reputation in the scientific community. That's why Fauci excluded him if, in fact, he did exclude him.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
If you aren't wondering why you've been lied to all along there is nothing that will help you.

You've been swallowing trump's thousands of lies for about 7 years now, and will most certainly vote for him again. You have zero credibility to call anyone on this.

quote:

I see and hear no reason not to believe the Former CDC Director’s testimony.

I see reason as to why he would be excluded. You can't see this?


"Redfield was a trump appointee with a bad reputation in the scientific community. That's why Fauci excluded him if, in fact, he did exclude him."

Funny thing is both the CDC and WHO had a great reputation.

Once political expediency got into the equation, all hell broke loose!

Now I don’t believe a word they say!

quote:

Once trump's lackeys got appointed into into the equation, all hell broke loose!

Fixed it for you, Saeed

quote:

Well, if I had to take a firm position on this, it would be that it was a lab leak, sloppy but not intentional.

That's my position as well.

Watching some lab footage last night on the news got me to thinking about how the refuse from these labs is treated.
Do they incinerate it or is it transported off site to be destroyed?
I know that a lot of bio burden gets outside of our hospitals here - even infectious materials.

There are many ways this could have been accidentally released.
The response to the release is what's most disconcerting.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
There is nothing skeptical about the Former CDC’s testimony under oath.

You need to do some research on Redfield. He has a history of being less than forthcoming about a lot of things.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
There is nothing skeptical about the Former CDC’s testimony under oath.

You need to do some research on Redfield. He has a history of being less than forthcoming about a lot of things.

Add Anthony 'beagle torturer' Fauci to your list.

It doesn’t matter who’s echo chamber it is, echo chambers are bad for information gathering and decision making.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
There is nothing skeptical about the Former CDC’s testimony under oath.

You need to do some research on Redfield. He has a history of being less than forthcoming about a lot of things.

Elaborate for us and be specific.

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:

quote:

I see and hear no reason not to believe the Former CDC Director’s testimony.

I see reason as to why he would be excluded. You can't see this?


"Redfield was a trump appointee with a bad reputation in the scientific community. That's why Fauci excluded him if, in fact, he did exclude him."

Dr. Bob Redfield does NOT have a bad reputation in the scientific community.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I was saying this^^^

When saying this wasn’t cool.

Years ago…I was acquainted with Dr. Bob Redfield. He is a class act.

What a surprise. You're friends with a kook who has previously been widely accused of research misconduct in relation to his work on HIV vaccine.

Redfield was a trump appointee with a bad reputation in the scientific community. That's why Fauci excluded him if, in fact, he did exclude him.

You have no earthly idea as to what your even talking about. Dr. Redfield is a highly respected virologist.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Well, if I had to take a firm position on this, it would be that it was a lab leak, sloppy but not intentional.

I don't feel the need to be conclusive about it. I'm not in charge, and my view doesn't matter.

So, I'm skeptical, of all of it, including the govt., the politicians, the media and especially anyone who claims he or she knows the whole truth.

I think it prudent for the powers that be to take all scenarios into account, and take preventative actions accordingly. Whatever the cause is likely to happen again.

===============================================

And yes, ANN, I am wondering - IF I was lied to, by Fauci or others, Why?

I'm very bias about this, as evidenced that in no way, no how can Rand Paul be right about anything.

A reasonable post there ME…humor noted.

why?
because Fraudchi provided 9 million grant reasons.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
There is nothing skeptical about the Former CDC’s testimony under oath.

You need to do some research on Redfield. He has a history of being less than forthcoming about a lot of things.

Elaborate for us and be specific.

Your google button still partisan? Redfield has a shady past, with money at the core.


https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/04...20political%20agenda.

I did Google at your insinuation. I did not find anything that makes me question his testimony.

The AIDS Vaccine trial does not indicate he is dishonest.

He also appears to have supported a policy to keep HIV/AIDS carriers out of the Military.

Redfield, then one of the Army's top AIDS researchers, was at the center of a scandal over a purported HIV vaccine. Allegations that Redfield oversold data and cherry-picked results sparked an internal Army investigation into his work. 

I really want to see the Army’s report on the issue.

Don't Believe Anybody Who Says They Know How COVID-19 Started. Here's Why
Story by Fred Guterl • 7h ago

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...40061ea7769220&ei=76

(first two paragraphs of the article)

In early 2020, as the pandemic was looming, Dr. Anthony Fauci corresponded with a group of scientists about the possibility that the COVID-19 virus escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China. After a conference call, the scientists published a paper downplaying the lab-leak theory.

Jim Jordan, a Republican representative from Ohio who began questioning witnesses on Wednesday in the House hearings on the origin of the pandemic, has his own way of weaving those facts into a narrative. It's a story of gross malfeasance, with Fauci as villain.

If you read up on that issue Kabob, you will see that there is questions.
There were several virologists who, through the genome sequencing, could not be a natural jump. After a conference call with Fauci, they changed their tune. Shortly after 9 million dollars changed hands to those virologists departments. The same NIH that gave them the funds, got 400 million from the vaccine companies. All with Fauci's fingerprints on it.

'Ignorance about the biological function': Virologist dispels testimony from GOP’s lab link 'expert' | Opinion
Story by Lindsay Beyerstein, The Editorial Board • 5h ago

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...02db1262bd1de1&ei=54

(excerpts from the article)

Wednesday’s House Oversight hearing on the origins of the coronavirus seemed as if wiped from a bat’s butt. It was the same old players ruminating over the same stale conspiracy theories.

After an all-out sprint called by President Biden to uncover the origins of the virus, the consensus of the US intelligence community remains that SARS-Cov-2 probably spilled over from wild animals, and that it’s neither genetically engineered nor a bioweapon.

Three years on, there’s still no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (or any other lab) had SARS-Cov-2 or any plausible progenitor virus before the outbreak. Most importantly, research has shown that the earliest cases of covid were tightly linked to one of the few markets in Wuhan that sold trafficked wildlife.

The GOP’s star witness was Dr. Robert Redfield, the former director of the Centers for Disease Control under Donald Trump.

The Republicans on the committee staked a lot on his credibility because, unlike their other witnesses (a science writer, and a self-described technology futurist), Redfield’s a virologist.

But Redfield botched basic facts in his testimony. And these weren’t trivial misstatements. He put false claims forward as his main reasons for thinking that SARS-Cov-2 was genetically engineered.

Redfield’s critics had plenty of time to roast him on Twitter because the GOP majority didn’t see fit to call any real virus experts to testify.

“Just looked in on the COVID origins to hear Redfield talking complete and utter gibberish,” tweeted Dr. Paul Bieniasz, who studies the evolution of viruses at the Rockefeller University.

Redfield falsely asserted that the SARS1 and MERS coronaviruses cannot spread person-to-person. He said, as a scientist, that he realized immediately that the Covid-19 virus was genetically engineered because it seemed designed to spread person-to-person, unlike SARS1 and MERS, which don’t spread that way.

Actually, the SARS1 and MERS coronaviruses do spread between people. SARS1 was so good at spreading person-to-person that it went to Canada all the way from China to kill hundreds.

So much for that argument.

Redfield insinuated that Chinese researchers must have taken a harmless bat virus and inserted into it a special sequence to make it infectious to people. In saying so, he grossly misstated the function of a viral feature known as the furin cleavage site (FCS). He said he suspected covid was genetically engineered because the virus’s furin cleavage site “totally changes the orientation of the binding domain of Covid [...] so it has high affinity for human [ACE2] receptors.”

None of this is true.

“The furin site is not involved in spike binding to the ACE2 receptor, and insertion of the furin site does not reorient the receptor binding domain to allow recognition of human ACE2,” Stephen Goldstein, a virologist at the University of Utah, explained to me.

“It's a stunning revelation about Redfield's ignorance about the biological function of the FCS as well as even a basic understanding of the Spike-ACE2 binding and viral entry,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan, and a co-author of one of the most influential papers arguing for a natural origin.

Redfield also spent time whining about how Anthony Fauci excluded him from a working group investigating the origins of SARS-Cov-2.

“It was told to me that they wanted a single narrative and that I obviously had a different point of view,” Redfield claimed.

He offered no evidence to support his claim that he’d been excluded because of his opinion that the virus was genetically engineered. However, Redfield’s claim is unlikely true because scientists who were initially sympathetic to a lab origin were invited to participate.

Maybe they thought Redfield was busy running the CDC during a global pandemic.

Or maybe Redfield was left out because he doesn’t know a furin cleavage site from a fusilli.

But the 3 virologists who Fauci had the conference call with had what they called proof.
Fauci claims " he doesnt remember the conversation" why they changed their minds after the call. Could it be " do you want the grant money or not" no-one knows do they.

All this BS, spewing doubt, disinformation, theory, conspiracy, etc. is rather disturbing but it's typical. Jordon is no surprise at all. It's his M.o.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...f9ee9186c017e6&ei=49

Fauci Responds to Ex-CDC Director’s ‘Disturbing’ Lab-Leak Suppression Accusation
Story by Ari Blaff • 8h ago

“I almost have to laugh at that,” Fauci told Fox News. “That’s totally bizarre. First of all, I wasn’t leaning totally strongly one way or the other. I’ve always kept an open mind. As the data evolved, and evolutionary virologists began to look at the data, it looked much more likely that it was a natural occurrence from an animal reservoir. I have always kept a completely open mind that it could be one or the other.”

Fauci went on to call Redfield’s accusations “disturbing.”

During the February 1 call, a group of evolutionary virologists suggested that Covid may have stemmed from a lab accident and may have been genetically engineered, according to the memo. But just three days later, four of the experts who attended that meeting wrote a paper, later published in Nature Medicine, that argued Covid had “mutations” that supported the explanation that it had been transmitted to humans from animals. Emails obtained by the subcommittee revealed that Fauci “prompted” the paper, as one of its authors put it in a cover email to a scientific journal.

During the Wednesday hearing, committee chairman Jim Jordan implied that Fauci dangled a multimillion-dollar grant to induce the researchers to change their previously-held opinions that the coronavirus originated from a lab in Wuhan, China.

“And then three months later, ‘shazam,’ they get $9 million from Dr. Fauci. Well, isn’t that something?” Jordan said at Wednesday’s hearing.

In his Thursday interview, Fauci insisted that the grant had been approved before his call with the virologists and emphasized that the grant had to survive many layers of scrutiny before being approved.

And yet, you have no idea if money was a factor in them changing their minds. You only read articles that reinforce your version of things.
Read up on the virologists that changed their minds, and why they were certain it couldnt come from a natural occurrence, before the Fauci call.

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
If you aren't wondering why you've been lied to all along there is nothing that will help you.

You've been swallowing trump's thousands of lies for about 7 years now, and will most certainly vote for him again. You have zero credibility to call anyone on this.

And now you are swallowing Biden's lies.....and will vote for him again......

Please explain the difference? Is it okay when a democrat lies? That seems to be your direction....


.

quote:

You only read articles that reinforce your version of things.

She IS a liberal after all.....its what they do!

My version of things?

I don't have a "version", like in a narrative. That's your game. Are you projecting again?

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Well, if I had to take a firm position on this, it would be that it was a lab leak, sloppy but not intentional.

I don't feel the need to be conclusive about it. I'm not in charge, and my view doesn't matter.

So, I'm skeptical, of all of it, including the govt., the politicians, the media and especially anyone who claims he or she knows the whole truth.

I think it prudent for the powers that be to take all scenarios into account, and take preventative actions accordingly. Whatever the cause is likely to happen again.

================================================

I just post and read articles that tell the truth based in facts and evidence, and perhaps lack of evidence for certain conclusions.

Yet, you criticize and make up shit.

It's plain to me that if I could possibly give you nothing but raw facts and evidence, for you to draw inference or conclusions from, that you could not help yourself from tainting it all with BS in your mind already.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I did Google at your insinuation. I did not find anything that makes me question his testimony.

The AIDS Vaccine trial does not indicate he is dishonest.

He also appears to have supported a policy to keep HIV/AIDS carriers out of the Military.

Redfield, then one of the Army's top AIDS researchers, was at the center of a scandal over a purported HIV vaccine. Allegations that Redfield oversold data and cherry-picked results sparked an internal Army investigation into his work. 

I really want to see the Army’s report on the issue.

The Army concluded there was NO dishonesty in his research or work.

As happens in medical research not uncommonly…two different researchers have opposing hypotheses on a subject and almost (maybe do) form personal vendettas against one another — each on a personal mission to discredit the other.

In this case, it seemed that Air Force Lt. Col. Dr. Craig Hendrix…also a prominent medical professional…had such a vendetta against Bob Redfield.

When working in novel areas of research…it is also not uncommon for different teams to arrive at different conclusions early in the game. It happens all the time. In this instance, one group was so sure they were rught and the other wrong…that one group filed a complaint against the other. An Inquiry was held and no wrongdoing was found — simply different research outcomes. Consequently, neither labs hypothesis on HIV panned out at the time. Both Redfield and Hendrix carried on in career and both hold prominent positions in prominent teaching instructions today.

I can see how a real professional could form a vendetta against a quack, considered harmful or dangerous.